■ 5
Evidence has been given in Structure for a division of the verse into five
cola, the first and third being the “before”-clauses and the other three being
the parallel main clauses. In this case “in the belly” and “from the womb” are
to be construed with their respective main verbs that follow rather than with
the “before”-clauses, or at least they will be heard with what comes after as
much as with what comes before.
The repetition of “before” (בְּטֶרֶם) is quite striking (note that the same repetition occurs again
in 13:16). This expression “before” occurs particularly in contexts of birth or
creation and death (compare Isa 42:9; 48:5; 66:7; Pss 39:14; 90:2).
Evidence has been given in Text for reading the first verb not
according to the qere’ as “I formed you” (אֶצָּרְךָ), but according to the ketib as “I summoned you” (אֲצוּרְךָ). Of course “formed” is what one would
expect, given the diction of Ps 139:13; doubtless then the expected verb
lingers behind “summoned” (compare the diction of Isa 49:1 and 5, which offers
both meanings). All five verbs then point toward Jrm’s being called. In Jrm’s
case his birth and his vocation are coterminous: there was never a time he was
not summoned.
The nouns “belly” (בֶּטֶן)
and “womb” (רֶחֶם) are often in parallelism (Isa 46:3; Pss
22:11; 58:4; Job 3:11; 10:18–19; 31:35), though “belly” does not occur
otherwise in Jer. Behind this diction may also lie Ps 22:10–11.
As already noted, the three main verbs are all parallel: “I knew you”
(יְדַעְתִּיךָ), “I designated you” (הִקְדַּשְׁתִּיךָ), “I made you” (נְתַתִּיךָ); they must be understood together. “Know”
(ידע) carries with it here two nuances that
carry it beyond the meaning of “be acquainted with” familiar in modern European
languages. The first is the intimacy of husband and wife; in Gen 4:1 we are
told that “Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived,” and the sexual
connotation of “know” is often present in the OT. At least this possibility
reminds us that “knowledge” in the OT is likely to be personal and relational.
Since Jrm will be called not to marry (16:2) and since there is indication more
than once that he understood his prophetic calling to have an intimacy
analogous to that of a wife with her husband (15:16; 20:7), it is not
illegitimate to see at the beginning of his call an intimation of that
metaphor. The second is that of the relationship of suzerain to vassal. In both
the OT and extrabiblical sources, “know” implies the suzerain’s recognition of
the legitimacy of the vassal’s relationship to him. Thus (to stay within the
OT) God says of Abraham in Gen 18:19, “For I knew him (יְדַעְתִּיו),” that is, I recognized him as my
legitimate servant; and similarly David, in responding to Nathan’s oracle,
says, “What more can David say, for you have known your servant, O Lord God” (2
Sam 7:20). “Know” here then implies both intimacy and a covenantal bond; Yahweh
chooses Jrm to be his spokesman and obligates him thereby.
The verb “I designated you” (הִקְדַּשְׁתִּיךָ) is similar. The root קדשׁ
has to do with what is “holy,” that is, what is the inherent realm of God, what
is at his disposal, what belongs to him. Thus in 2:3 Israel is stated to be קֹדֶשׁ to Yahweh, that is, his possession, at his
disposal; the passages are thus analogous. The hip‘il stem here means
“designate someone to be consecrated, set someone aside for God’s purposes.”
The older translations (KJV:
“sanctified”; RSV: “consecrated”) are
correct but imply to the modern reader that Jrm was made pure, whereas the
accent is on his being designated for God’s task. This verb then carries
covenantal overtones just as “know” does.
What is indicated in general in v 5a is made specific in v 5b: Jrm is
made a “prophet” (נָבִיא).
One notes that the verb נתן,
literally “give,” means “make” when occurring with two accusatives (compare the
close parallel Exod 7:1); the same verb will mean “put” in v 9.
It is a daring affirmation to make, that Jrm is called to be a prophet
from his birth. It is intimated that Moses, Samson, and Samuel were each called
to their tasks from their birth, but the closest parallels in existence in
Jrm’s time are royal ones from Mesopotamia and Egypt (see Form). The diction
will be used later by Deutero-Isaiah and by NT writers (Paul about himself,
Matthew and Luke about Jesus Christ: see again Form). Whether the royal models
were at the forefront of Jrm’s perception or not, it remains true that the
experience of the providence of God attracts men and women throughout history
to such language of predestination. Jrm may have grappled with the call to be a
prophet when he was only a youth, but he became convinced that Yahweh had been
calling him from the beginning of his existence.
The literature on the role of “prophet” is immense; beyond such
general literature see particularly the remarks in Form and in the Introduction
in Jeremiah 2.
But Jrm is called specifically to be a prophet “to the nations,”
plural. It is again a daring word to find in the call. (Bernhard Stade’s
suggestion to emend the word to “to my nation” is to be rejected.) Earlier
prophets never felt themselves confined simply to Israel and Judah, and Amos
and Isaiah offered oracles destined for various nations that impinged upon
Israel and Judah; but no other prophet perceived in his call that specific far
extent of his office. And it is reinforced by the words “over nations and over
kingdoms” in v 10. Does it begin by Jrm’s perception of the two entities,
Israel and Judah? In any event, it is a true internationalizing of the
prophetic office: Jrm may be destined to speak largely to the local necessities
of Judah, but there will be no limitation to the effectiveness of the word he
speaks. Wilhelm Vischer may be overimaginative to suggest that in order to be
called to the nations Jrm had to be called before birth; still, the reach of
both the extent of time for his call and the extent of space over which he is
called are stretched beyond what is expected. We are alerted to Jrm’s unique
set of perceptions as to the nature of his prophetic call. What was it like to
hear these lines hammering in one’s ear? The call must have seemed
self-validating to Jrm (William Lee Holladay, Jeremiah 1: A
Commentary on the Book of The Prophet Jeremiah, Chapters 1-25 [Hermeneia—a Critical
and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986],
33-34)
